Terabyte HDDs out of the closet

Nathan Davis
08 January 2007, 5:16 AM


Both Seagate and Hitachi claim they're the first with a terabyte hard drive. Forget who's first -- who's best?


Seagate and Hitachi have simultaneously flushed out more information on their upcoming competing terabyte hard drives.

Both claim they will be the first.

"We expect to be the first to deliver 1TB hard drives in high volume for global customers," trumpets a faceless Seagate spokesperson.

"Hitachi is leading a new era for hard drives," beams Hitachi's chief marketing chum, Shinjiro Iwata. "The industry's first one-terabyte hard drive represents a milestone that is 50 years in the making," he reckons.

We're pretty sure Hitachi wasn't referring to Seagate, but politics is oh so confusing. Droll, even.

Seagate says its terabyte drives will be available sometime within the first half of this year. Hitachi was doubly optimistic, declaring it'll fire out the first drives during the first quarter.

Luckily, there's a difference between the two drives, so sod who's first. Hitachi's terror-biter stores its data on five platters, inherently using ten pricey read-write heads. On the other hand, Seagate's only uses four platters (so eight read-write heads) to store its feisty terabyte.

With better reliability and less power consumption, it is generally considered Good(TM) if a drive has less platters and resulting heads. Also, they're cheaper to produce, particularly with less heads (one of the most expensive components in a hard drive), but you probably won't see this saving.

 

Hitachi's terabyte drive gone naked: If your drive looks like this, don't be aroused. Just be concerned.Hitachi's terabyte drive gone naked: If your drive looks like this, don't be aroused. Just be concerned.


In other news, according to DigiTimes, market researcher iSuppli says 100GB to 160GB is the sweet spot in the PC hard drive storage arena, aged as that may be.

Unsurprisingly, it believes the one terabyte drives will only achieve a three to five percent market share in the PC market over the next five to seven years.

This is no surprise, though, really, because that 3-5 percent simply includes the more niche areas that use high-end hard drives; namely, enthusiasts and consumer electronics.

These are the same groups that first pick up new technologies, such as, oh, the 160GB hard drives when they first hit town.

That said, in terms of raw bang for coin, the Aussie sweet spot is currently 250GB drives, hovering around $.38 per GB, although the 300GBers are beginning to look tasty.

In which case, if you're an enthusiast, you'll save some pocket and gain both performance and reliability by instead building a RAID 5 of said drives.

I'm still waiting for my petabyte drive.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Piffle Merchants:

It still sheets me that the hard drive folks measure drive size in base-10 units, while the true software measure of size has always been base-2. Earlier on the difference wasn't too wide, but now the gap between 1MB=1,000,000bytes and 1MB=1,048,576bytes is getting pretty big.

So these new drives are delivering, what... roughly 90GB less than a true Terabyte? Subtract formatting headroom and we're looking at 100GB of 'missing' capacity.

I don't mind we're not at a full TB yet, I just hate the way goalposts have been manipulated to somewhere they've never existed.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Nathan Davis:

It is a known problem, however, it is in fact the software that lies to you. All hard drive manufacturers use decimal notation, or base-10.

What we have been conditioned to believe, at least in the software world, is that a kilobyte is 1024 bytes, when, in fact, this is not at all true.

The very definition of the prefix, kilo, is 10^3, or one thousand, hence kilometre and kilogram.

If you're interested in the history, I'd suggest you start reading here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix#Hard_disk_drives

Coming back to your question of how large these terabyte drives are, they will hold exactly one trillion bytes, or 909.4 gibibytes or GiB (you're incorrectly told these are gigabytes).



29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous:

I beg to differ with your analysis of the Kilobyte/Megabyte/Gigabyte etc. Situation.

Because hard drives store data in a Binary format, they are only able to store actual data in Bytes, ie 8 bits per character (generally).

The Binary system uses base 2 numbers. Therefore, Groups of bytes must conform to base 2 sizes. This is why your software records data in "Clusters". While the size of the "Clusters" can vary depending on your OS, your FileSystem and you Hardware, commonly they are in clusters of 16, 32 or 64K.

Therefore, The closest possible storage amount to 1000 bytes is in fact 2 ^ 10, or 1024 Bytes (or 16 Clusters, in this case).

Hard drive manufacters may always have adopted the "Weasel" method, reporting that there are 1000 Bytes in a kilobyte, 1000 kilobytes in a megabyte (etc.), however this still cannot change the fact that Binary data is used to store the data, therefore there is no "1000 byte" size denomination.

I'd love to hear your thoughts and your comments on this topic!!




29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Andy Doss:

I anticipate the realease of a 1 Terabyte HHD mainly because of the Decreased prices in lower sized HHDs such as the 500GB.

Lets be Serious, For most of us a 500GB HHD is more then enough. So much people will be applauding the release of a Terabyte HHD mainly cause of the reason stated in my first paragraph about prices.

Though i do believe we are onto something Great and that first comes the 1Tera HHD then comes the 1Peta HDD and so on.Things are excelling so much at this point i cant help but really anticipate what tomorow is going to bring.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

azs:

I currently have about 450Gb of storage at home, my biggest problem is backing up this data. Unfortunately it appears that HDD technology is racing ahead of backup technology.

Having the data mirrored on the same machine is not a real solution (one point of failure). It needs to be onto a portable external device.

The problem then becomes one of data transport as well as storage, how long will it take to backup over USB2? Realistically the only option is external sata.

So to put in a 1TB drive I will need to buy an additional 2 ITB eSata externals so I can maintain an offsite backup. Hmm I'm sure that she who must be obeyed won't mind.

Perhaps its time we seriously looked at home backup solutions.

29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous:

wow 1TB !!!!!!! thats so awesome !!!!!! its a pirates dream to fill it up with softwares, movies, music, e-books =D =D how much will it cost ?? i nearly have 1tb in hdd space atm on 3 hdds one single hdd would make it easier and i could upgrade to too one day hahaha...

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Brett:

If you wanted to defrag a drive that big it would take a week.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Nicholas:

Not quite my new system with 2 320GB hard drives for a total of 640GB (596GB formatted) takes about 45 minutes to defrag. Now full formatting it would take a while though. to do a full format on a 320GB took just over an hour, thus for 1TB would be a little over 3 hours.

29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tim Polmear:

Yeah, but what about a chkdisk?? :P

29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous:

Man...I remember building a terabyte storage back 13yrs ago, we had 1 whole room of 8Gb HDDs in SUN 6 disks packs, RAID 5'ed with mirroring. That was SOOOO noisy! But yet it was such an achievement back then to have a Tb storage. Now, finally 1 Tb in 1 HDD format. I've waited for this day long enough. Now we can start building our own 7 Pb storage to take over from Telstra. Hahaha

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user